Cases: SLAPP

SLAPP: Trial Court Properly Denied SLAPP Motion, But Did Not Abuse Discretion In Denying Attorney Fees Requested By Prevailing Cross-Complainants

Cases: SLAPP

SLAPP Motion Sought To Strike Allegations That Were Not Connected To An Identified Claim For Relief, But Was Not Frivolous.             In Noguera v. Hull, Case No. A157714 (1st Dist., Div. 1 January 29, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiff sued neighbor defendants for their alleged failure to pay their share of improvement costs for certain improvements to […]

Ethics, POOF!, SLAPP!: Attorney Fees And Costs Awarded To Successfully SLAPPing Defendants Goes POOF! With Reversal Of Trial Court’s Partial Grant Of Defendants’ SLAPP Motion

Cases: Ethics, Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

Defendants’ Internet And Twitter Statements Against Plaintiffs Consisted Mainly Of "Vulgar And/Or Adolescent Personal Insults, Misogynistic, Racist, And Xenophobic Comments, And Other Slurs Having Nothing To Do With Any Reasoned Discussion Of Trustworthiness, Competence, Or Any Other 'Public Issue Or An Issue Of Public Interest.'”             In Block v. Bramzon, Case Nos. B292129/B297198 (2d

Fees On Fees, SLAPP: Trial Court’s Additional Award To Successfully SLAPPing Defendant Of $15,660 In Fees And $368.44 In Costs After Initial Fees Award Of $10,910 And $60 In Costs Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Fees on Fees, Cases: SLAPP

Defendant Was Entitled To Recover Fees And Costs Incurred In Responding To Plaintiff’s Numerous Attempts To Overturn The Trial Court’s Grant Of The SLAPP Motion, Not Just The Fees/Costs She Incurred In Bringing The Anti-SLAPP Motion.             After successfully SLAPPing plaintiff’s complaint and being awarded $10,910 in attorney fees and $60 in costs under

SLAPP: $24,175 In Attorney’s Fees Award Was No Abuse Of Discretion For A Litigant Successfully Striking A Defamation Cross-Claim

Cases: SLAPP

No Meet And Confer Requirement Under SLAPP Statute, With Cross-Complainant Not Dismissing The Cross-Complaint Until After The SLAPP Motion Was Filed.             In Trinity Risk Management, LLC v. Simplified Labor Staffing Solutions, Inc., Case No. B297176 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Jan. 11, 2021 unpublished; published on Jan. 14, 2021), a cross-complainant—although indicating an intent to

SLAPP, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: Founding Partner Of Software Company Did Get Hit With Some Fee/Costs Exposure From Shareholder Derivative Case And Malicious Prosecution Case Which Was SLAPPed

Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Not Huge Amounts, But Some Challenges Were Untimely And Some Were Not Meritorious.             To end the year, we post on Storix, Inc. v. Johnson, Case Nos. D075308/D077096 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Dec. 31, 2020) (unpublished), which was a very contested dispute between software company Storix and founder Mr. Johnson, which dragged in various directors

SLAPP: 1/2 DCA, Although Acknowledging Slim Nature Of Defense SLAPP Motion, Sustained Not Awarding Fees To Plaintiff For A Claimed Frivolous SLAPP Motion

Cases: SLAPP

Matter Was Close, But Deference To Trial Judge Made The Difference.             In Guinnane Construction Co., Inc. v. Chess, Case No. A157781 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 22, 2020) (unpublished), plaintiff won a SLAPP motion and moved for fees based on the contention that the defense motion was frivolous.  The trial judge denied plaintiff’s fee

SLAPP: 2/2 DCA Affirms $33,060 In Fees Awarded Against SLAPPing Defendants For Filing A Frivolous Motion To Strike For The Sole Purpose Of Delay

Cases: SLAPP

Defendants Could Not Strike A Cause Of Action For Breach Under The Anti-SLAPP Statute On The Ground Of Privileged Conduct Where Defendants Clearly Breached A Contract Not To Assert Particular Claims.             Rubin v. Kessler, Case No. B301967 (2d Dist., Div. 2 December 18, 2020) (unpublished) involves a bitter neighbor dispute – described by Los

SLAPP: $43,000 Out Of Requested $66,750 In Fees Was Awarded Because The Defense Brought A Frivolous SLAPP Motion

Cases: SLAPP

Hourly Rate For One Attorney And Hearing Appearance Work Was Reduced.             Defendants, in bringing SLAPP motions, do not get a “pass the jail/wild card.”  If a defense motion is frivolous, then the plaintiff can move to recover attorney’s fees for successfully opposing the SLAPP motion.  That is what occurred in Lora v. Parter Medical

Poof!, SLAPP: Trial Court’s Award Of $11,075 In Attorney Fees And Costs To Successfully SLAPPing Defendant Goes Poof! When 4/3 DCA Reverses SLAPP Grant

Cases: POOF!, Cases: SLAPP

Plaintiff’s Attempt To Initiate A Review Hearing With Private Swim Club On Coach’s Conduct Did Not Qualify As A Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(e)(1) Official Proceeding Authorized By Law, And Swim Club’s Responding Accusation Against Plaintiff’s Son Did Not Qualify As An Issue Of Public Interest Pursuant To Anti-SLAPP Law.             In

Costs, SLAPP: 5/5 DCA Affirms Trial Court’s Award Of Attorney’s Fees Against Unsuccessful SLAPPing Defendants And Granting Of Dismissed Plaintiffs’ Motion To Strike/Tax Defendants’ Request For Costs

Cases: Costs, Cases: SLAPP

Defendants’ Anti-SLAPP Motion Was Not Based On Protected Activities And Determined Frivolous, And Order On Costs Was Not Appealable Under The One Final Judgment Rule.             In Lang v. Petaluma Hills Farm, Case No. A156614 (5th Dist., Div. 5 November 20, 2020) (unpublished), several neighbors sued other neighbors – claiming defendant neighbors were conducting

Scroll to Top